LCD v. Plasma

pmerkin · Dec 8, 2006

Just wondering if anyone can weigh in on the flat-screen debate.

I was all set to get a Panasonic 50" plasma, but then saw the latest Sony 46" LCD XBR at Circuity City which, to my eyes, had the best picture I've ever seen on a flat screen. Of course they had a nice HD signal going to it, so I'm just wondering if anyone has experience with that particular model, the Sony KDL46XBR2, and how it handles a standard def. signal. In older models I've seen, plasma seemed a little more forgiving of SD, whereas the LCD screens got very blocky.

argleby · Dec 8, 2006

pmerkin said:

I'm no expert but my understanding was that for big screens (mid-30s and larger), plasmas are better. I think the advantages were better pixel response time for quick-changing scenes (e.g. explosions) and deeper blacks. On the other hand, they fade with time and LCDs don't.

Ozzy · Dec 8, 2006

Second generation plazmas are remarkably better re: burn out. You'll have to spend top dollar to get one though.

DLP's are a better picture than an LCD but you can't mount them on a wall (they're not flat).

Anything Sony (XBR series) is going to blow the doors of the competition. When it comes to TV's nobody beats Sony and don't let anyone tell you different. Price wise Sony is substantially more. Back when we we're talking regular TV's (5-10 years ago) up to 36"... Toshiba was pretty darn close to Sony for about 25-50% less cost. But once the LCD's and Plasma's took off Toshiba (and Mitsubishi) have sort of wilted while Panasonic and Pioneer have climbed to the top of the heap. Phillips which also makes a kick ass Plasma have always been top shelf in quality.

rotten · Dec 8, 2006

LCD is the way to go. You can use it as a computer monitor. And since more electronic support digital video signals, it will look better on LCD with HDMI input.

Lou Grant · Dec 9, 2006

Ozzy said:

If your consideration is not to mount the unit onto the wall, I would definite urge you to take a look at the DLPs. Like Ozzy says, they have a much better picture than either the LCD or the Plasma, hands down - brighter colors and truer blacks. The prices, however, are still a little above the plasmas, as those prices have dropped thru the floor and you could score a reasonable 42" for under or around a grand now a days. When I went looking for my current unit, I went with the DLP (Samsung model) because I felt it had the best picture, both standard and HD. But the only way you will know for sure is to go out and check the tv's yourself, just avoid the Best Buys and Circuit city's as they don't have the proper lighting to compare the screens.

njman2 · Dec 9, 2006

DLP is definitely my choice.

Does it have to be a flat TV? Is that really really important?

Picture and sound are personal choices - but I used CNET's TV buying guide to make my decision (pretty decent guide) and fell in love with http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/<wb...ame=tv_ProjectionTVs_RearProjection_55to80TVs.

The main advantage of a flat TV is that it takes less space. Roughly 6 to 7 square feet or so (can even put something in the space under the tv and spend a lot less space). The DLP above is going to eat up about 16sf with the stand (~roughly 7 by 2.2)

Regardless of display technology - try to buy a true HDTV - prefferably with 1080p. It will pay off in the long run.

dampfnudel · Dec 9, 2006

I would go with the LCD. I'm in the market myself (probably 32" or 37") and plan to get a LCD.

Ozzy · Dec 9, 2006

I would never go LCD over DLP. LCD you're getting dead pixles, anything over 40" and you're looking for trouble. The response times on LCD's suck... watch some "Die Hard" explosions and the last thing you'll be yelling is "Yippie Ka-yay".

Ozzy · Dec 9, 2006

njman2 said:

Dollar for dollar one of the best TV's on the market. There's 10,000 and 15,000 dollar TV's that aren't as good.

pmerkin · Dec 9, 2006

Hi all --

Thanks for the advice. I see on some AV boards that the Sony LCD is suffering some serious QC issues. The area the TV is to go dictates it be a flat screen, I'd never even considered DLP, but now that I've been researching it . . .the confusion only deepens. Of course there's always the option to do nothing and see what the NEXT generation looks like, while I continue to watch my 16-yr-old, 27" Sony XBR. Sigh . . .

elmo16 · Dec 20, 2006

Ozzy said:

LCD TV's being sold today all (except the smallest and least expensive, I would say) have a response time of 8ms, which eliminates the blurring you saw on early models of LCD screens.

From the ads I’ve seen, LCD screens seem to be cornering the market, so I would say LCD TV’s are the way to go today.

elmo16 · Dec 20, 2006

From the reviews I've read, dead pixles on LCD screeens seem to be a thing of the past

LCD technology has improved greatly, just as the price of these screens have gone down a lot. LCD screens are now being used for every thing from cell phones, MP3 players, note book computer screens, desk top computer screens, TV’s.

Such common use of this technology can only make the technology cheaper, better and more reliable.

Plasma and DLP screens days are numbered imho..

Ozzy · Dec 20, 2006

You read wrong..... LCD dead pixel issues are current and continue to be the major flaw in LCD's. So much so that most states have laws pertaining to how many dead pixels are allowed. Last I checked in NY it was about a dozen on screens smaller than 40 inches. Anyone telling you different is probably trying to sell you one.

No way the response times of the best LCD's match that of the Plazmas... none, nadda, zilch, zip... Hope thats perfectly clear.

The only reason LCD's are used in phones. laptops etc is because DLP aren't made that small nor are plazmas and then there's the cost issue even if they could be produced. Lets not forget that LCD has about a 30-35 year head start on Plazma technology... and it's still not as good, at best it's equal depending on opinions.

Plazma's days are certainly not numbered. Fact is the plazma technology is not only the format of the future, but has mucho room for improvement as the technology and cost allows. Same as everyone knew the early processor would improve as the tools and equipment used to make them improved.

aceofclubs26 · Dec 21, 2006

Dlp?

The owner of a TV repair shop told me that DLP is crap and is only being marketed heavily this year and next until the LCD screens start being mass produced in larger sizes at an affordable price. Any truth to this? I didn't know if he was biased since the replacing of the bulbs that could be done by anyone would obviously cut into his trade.

Ozzy · Dec 21, 2006

DLP's will be around for a while. What they are basically is a bridge between LCD/Plas technology and projection. It's the best bang for the buck right now. LCD's are getting cheaper cause the technology is older, but DLP's will lower in price as well and stick around to kill off the last of the old projections. They're already in something like their 20th generation of the LCD. Plasma is only second and third generation. Plasma when improved and perfected with time will toast anything currently available in every way. The LCD pixel issue is on going. The gov't stepped in and passed guidelines for how many dead pixels can deem the product "faulty". So the manufacturers have a max quota on dead pixels they have to stay below. So the cost of producing LCD is supposed to go up higher for the newer models with improved pixel issues. But it's rare you see a bigger screen without at least 1 or 2 dead ones. A majority of the time it's between 3-6 on 50" and over and that's the more reliable equipment.

Ozzy · Dec 21, 2006

For everyone looking at their 19 and 21 inch monitors. Go to a black screen and you can easily count your dead pixels. At that size I'd say 25-35% of you might have no bad pixels. But the rest will have 1 or 2 or more. The bigger the screen the better chance of having dp's.

stevana · Dec 22, 2006

OK, Ozzy. I am truly convinced that you know what you are talking about and I know nothing about the technology. I want something that looks and sounds as good as it gets for about $3K. I respectfully request your advice as to what to buy. Thank you.

aceofclubs26 · Dec 22, 2006

I gotta agree...seems like Ozzy is the guru of this topic. I have an older HDTV that gets 1080i. No 720p or 1080p. I'm happy with it and and it was one of the higher rated TV's for it's class in 2000. Still has a great picture and I replaced the convergence circuits a few months ago. I kind of want this TV to last but it's a 43" 4:3 screen and I just put it into an 18' living room so now it's small for the room. Should I shop for a 61" DLP now and get any sort of assurance it would still be a great TV ten years from now. Or should I hold out another few years because the improved larger LCD/Plasma sets will be more affordable and a better quality?

Ozzy · Dec 22, 2006

I don't claim to be a guru, but selling, designing and building home theaters from low end to over a few hundred thousand dollar commercial and residential systems is my business...

If you had to change a convergence circuit than you have a rear projection TV. If it's an HD 4:3 then it's good enough for whats available right now, so you should hang on to it and ride it out for another year or so. Right now it's a waste of money (if that's any issue) to jump into the HD market when the infrastructure for HD isn't even up to the market supply yet. You can buy all the HD equipment you and but there's very few HD-DVD's available and even less HD programming available at this point.... And don't forget that you will never see those older movies you love in true HD format cause they were never filmed in the format to begin with. So why not wait a year or so till broadcast HD and the amount of HD- DVD's are more widely available... and the prices of the equipment are going to drop about 30%. However... if it's the picture quality you want to improve over your projection or standard TV then by all means go out and pop for a good DLP, LCD or Plasma. But when it comes to LCD and Plasma... the models due out in the coming year will be vastly improved over whats out now.

But simply there is a vast difference in picture quality from Plasma to LCD. For one LCD can not match (and never will by design) the black level of a plasma or even a DLP because it allows light to seep thru its pixels. Then there's viewing angle which LCD fails miserably in conpared to all the others.

Here's a quick breakdown of the current standards....

Rear Projection

CRT...
Upside: Relatively inexpensive; excellent black-level performance; still the best picture quality in a proper environment with proper setup.

Downside: Deep cabinets; need periodic maintenance; not ideal for bright rooms; narrow viewing angle; softer image than microdisplays; most cannot display computer signals

Forecast: These dinosaurs are quickly being phased out in favor of lighter, lamp-driven microdisplays, and their demise in clearly in sight.

DLP...
Upside: Good black-level performance; no maintenance required to preserve sharpness; often computer-capable; thin and light compared to CRT.

Downside: Expensive; some rainbow effects; video noise in dark areas; periodic lamp replacement required.

Principal brands: Samsung, Toshiba, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, LG, RCA

Forecast: DLP is only getting cheaper and more popular, although LCD will give it plenty of competition

LCD...
Upside: No rainbow effect; no maintenance required to preserve sharpness; often computer-capable; thin and light compared to CRT.

Downside: Expensive; blacks not quite as deep as DLP; periodic lamp replacement required.

Principal brands: Sony, Hitachi, Panasonic, LG

Forecast: LCD has made some tremendous leaps in performance and will continue to challenge DLP as prices fall fast.

LCoS...
Upside: Excellent interpixel fill; no maintenance required to preserve sharpness; thin and light compared to CRT; more dependent on variants (below).

Downside: Periodic lamp replacement required; more dependent on variants

Principal brands: JVC, Sony, Hitachi

Forecast: LCoS is back from the dead, and two radically different variants prove the technology has plenty of staying power.

Flat Panel

Plasma...
Upside: As little as three inches thick; very good home-theater image quality in best examples; wide viewing angle.

Downside: Relatively expensive; slight potential for burn-in.

Forecast: Prices have fallen, and pictures have improved dramatically, perpetuating plasma's place as king of the flat-panel home-theater hill

LCD...
Upside: Higher resolution than comparably sized plasmas; no danger of burn-in.

Downside: Expensive in larger sizes; home-theater image quality not as good as plasma; relatively narrow viewing angle.

Forecast: Prices on this technology should fall precipitously over the next couple of years, following the computer LCD trend. Meanwhile, image quality will go up

flabbergasted · Dec 22, 2006

I have a Panasonic LCD for three years and couldn't be happier with it. The HDTV is sharp and clear, great for football games. The whole unit is light, the only negative is the projection lamp. They cost $200 to replace but should last you at least a couple of years if not longer.